Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Is the era of the nation-state at an end


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1
Unity

Unity

    Information Organism

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,437 posts
https://www.weforum....ation-populism/

Please read before posting
  • rennerpetey likes this

#2
Jakob

Jakob

    Fenny-Eyed Slubber-Yuck

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,166 posts
  • LocationIn the Basket of Deplorables

No. An internet community with no physical territory inherently cannot occupy the role of the nation-state. Nor has globalism yet conclusively beaten nationalism, as we can see from Brexit and Trump.

 

Nation states are also much older, dating back to the Peace of Westphalia in the mid 17th century.


Click 'show' to see quotes from great luminaries.

Spoiler

#3
Erowind

Erowind

    Psychonaut, Aspiring Mathematician and Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 517 posts
  • LocationInside some convoluted formula I don't actually understand.

As much as I want both capitalism and the state to die soon; I only see the state dying soon. Anarcho-capitalism is going to utterly destroy the current power structures, the new seats of power are already hotbeds for this sort of thing. Libertarianism is old hat, the richest and most powerful of tomorrow are being born today in the fluorescent glow of the blockchain and the DAG. Digital consensus holds parties accountable, megacorps reign control over governments and cypherpunks run amok on the net.

 

Human history has already seen states without capitalism to an extent and now it will witness capitalism without the state, both are very ugly for different reasons.


Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#4
Erowind

Erowind

    Psychonaut, Aspiring Mathematician and Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 517 posts
  • LocationInside some convoluted formula I don't actually understand.

Nation states are also much older, dating back to the Peace of Westphalia in the mid 17th century.

 

So were the empires they replaced.


Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#5
Jakob

Jakob

    Fenny-Eyed Slubber-Yuck

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,166 posts
  • LocationIn the Basket of Deplorables

 


Nation states are also much older, dating back to the Peace of Westphalia in the mid 17th century.

 

So were the empires they replaced.

 

No, I mean older than claimed in the article.


  • Erowind likes this

Click 'show' to see quotes from great luminaries.

Spoiler

#6
Erowind

Erowind

    Psychonaut, Aspiring Mathematician and Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 517 posts
  • LocationInside some convoluted formula I don't actually understand.

 

 


Nation states are also much older, dating back to the Peace of Westphalia in the mid 17th century.

 

So were the empires they replaced.

 

No, I mean older than claimed in the article.

 

Oh you mean the concept of countries in general, that makes more sense.


  • Jakob likes this

Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#7
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 691 posts
  • LocationLondon

I think we have some time before nation states could be replaced. At the moment the majority of nations are running political/economic systems designed to resist change and stay stable.

 

As a result getting them to change will either require crisis or revolution of some kind, or technology advancing to the point that we can establish wholly new states. Either through off planet colonisation, or a corporation building an island in international waters or a corporation/individual buying territory from a govt, or something. 

 

 

Once a few new prototypes are up and running, pressure will begin to mount for change in the direction of the more successful new models. which could allow the dissolution of nation states etc.



#8
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,070 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

We are not close to the end of the nation-state, regardless of what the World Economic Forum may claim. Though I do admit that the classical concept of "nation" (which is somewhat synonymous with race or ethnicity) will vanish over the decades. In some ways, this has already begun in the West. Usually the most cosmopolitan areas. Like America— there is no "American Nation" unless you include Native groups or white nationalist groups claiming it as theirs. Likewise, look to the Nation of Islam— black nationalists who adopted Islam mostly to offend white middle America and thought of themselves as a unified nation of people. If they had their own nation-state, that meant they had a political state formed and controlled by their nation. That is, the descendants of African slaves who adopted such a radical lifestyle. 

Or the Jewish nation— existing for thousands of years, but only recently receiving their own nation-state. 

 

It's not always divided along racial boundaries (nation describes culture as well as ethnicity), but when I said that the nation-state has vanished in the west, this is what I was referring to.

 

100 years ago, the Irish were lower than the Negro in the eyes of "proper" White society. If you came from Ireland or had Irish blood in America, you actually probably had a life on par with that of the slaves, if not had an ancestor who was an indentured servant. We don't usually talk about it since they weren't chattel slaves like the Africans, but it still happened. 

But as we know today, the Irish might very well possess the whitest skin on Earth. So how on Earth were they so horribly treated by fellow Whites back in the day? Because racism before the present (1945 on back) was based heavily on national and ethnic lines just as much as it was on appearance. Hell, one could argue racism began as nationalist discrimination— our current word for "barbarian" comes from the Greeks, who considered all non-Greeks to be unintelligible peoples who only said "bar bar bar" all day, hence the word "barbaroi", hence the word "barbarian". Racial appearance mattered less than your nation and place of origin.

 

 

 

So in that regard, yes, the nation-state is likely at an end. We aren't really creating new states based on cultural or ethnic groups anymore. Now, that doesn't mean we never do it— if the Catalan independence movement succeeded, the Catalan nation would have had its own state, ergo a new nation-state— but if we started creating new nations on, say, Antarctica for whatever reason, there's a far lower chance that they'd be based purely on culture and ethnicity than they used to be. 

Culture would still be a defining factor, and I think a nation founded by America's John Smith will have a different culture than one founded by China's Xiao Zhang. But if they were based around purely secular and post-modern sensibilities, there'd likely not be any one dominant nation.


  • Jakob and Alislaws like this
Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users